THE CONCEPT OF “ARTISTIC TEXT” AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE DOCUMENTATION SCIENCES

8/8/2019 THE CONCEPT OF ARTISTIC TEXT AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE DOCUMENTATION SCIENCES

1/32


2/32


3/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

+

manifestations considered secondary the photograph and the publicity, notably they achieved that it was conceded to them.

The reasons that explain such event are about the postponement allthe iconic representations suffered from in its consideration as transmitter means ofcultured information, after the westerner humanistic culture had chosen the literarysupport and the textual structure like the means for antonomasia, for thetransmission and diffusion of the scientific knowledge (SIMONE, 2001; ODONNELL,2000).

Although the object of this work is not to analyze the complexeconomical, social, technological and cultural processes that concurred in this

election, it is not possible to obviate that such designation supposed a notable delayin the consideration of the artistic image as a document, an information resource, oran object of study to other disciplines different from the ones that valued its aestheticcondition.

Presently, the communicative statute (Figure 1) of the artistic imagesis recognized and consolidated, though, it is necessary to keep asking ourselves,from interdisciplinary scientific approaches in which specific orders perform suchcommunication; which the participant subjects, the circulation channels, thecommunicative contexts, the process objectives and motivations, the nature of themessage, the codes that participate in its elaboration, etc, are.


4/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

*

Figure 1 The work of art as communication

For the objectives of this work, it is interesting to advance hereinsome aspects that clarify the specific communicative interests of the artistic image.

In fact, within the artistic images, the pictorial portrays reveal a set ofcommunicative resources that interfere in many semiotic orders:


5/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

)

a) In therepresentation order. b) In thecommemoration and exaltation order.

c) In thepersuasion order. As content analysts , our objective is to understand the complex

dynamics of production, use and reception of the pictorial portrays, responding to itsorigin and typology, and placing them in the context thatmakes them legible , so thatit is possible to investigate the correlations that take place between the aestheticarchitecture and the communicative function of those artistic images.

As specifically documental investigators , our observation, moreover,has to generate some documental products that permit to communicate and

subsequently recover the result of that exam inside the information systems in whichthose artistic images are developed.

In the great part of the cultural processes, thepictorial portrays are presented as symbolic elements that serve not only to theself-representation andfor it, for the self-definition of the society that produces them but also for theexaltation and the persuasion of the values of a kind of society and of its culture.However, given their artistic condition, they are subject to the ambiguity and to thesignificant polysemy peculiar of all aesthetic speeches.

They do not work as simple and linear illustrations2 emanated orappropriated by the established authority or in its case, by the anti-establishmentmovement but, they frequently experiment complicated reassignment processes ofnew significations, and finish generating contradictory messages in their addressees contemporary or future depending on their formation, reception capacity, culturethey are part of, as well as many other factors such as their age, gender, social class,ideology, etc.

The abstract categories derived from a certain economical system production forces, economical agents, wealth, commerce, property, etc. of apolitical system kingdom, sovereignty, authority, jurisdiction, monarchy, people,

2 We intentionally used the signification of the termillustration with the same meaning that gathers thetwenty-first edition of theDiccionario de la Lengua Espaola (Dictionary of the Spanish Language) ofReal Academia, that, in its second edition defines this word as stamp, picture or drawing thatdecorates or documents a book.


6/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

state, army, etc. of a social system social class, estate, hierarchy, nobleness,aristocracy, bourgeoisie, etc and of a religious system beliefs, morality, orders,

precepts have been conceived along history, thanks to their complex processes ofanalogy or association, under symbolic forms or personified representations.

In this sense, the art has been one of the most efficient means thatthe occidental visual culture has at disposal of the ideological systems in order toprovide iconic consistency to the complex cultural abstractions that permit toorganize a determined society. Similarly, different artistic manifestations haveperformed an important role in the establishment and maintenance of the authoritythrough the figurative or symbolic representation processes of that one, through its

symbolic performance in ceremonies, rituals, feasts, celebrations, monuments,money, etc.

This way, the artistic images and specially the portrays besides joining the expressive wills of the artist and his or her receptor, shape and materializesocial, juridical, political, philosophical, cultural, etc. concepts, throughrepresentations of people that, on the other hand, turn into transmitter informationbodies through their own body language, costume, attributes, form they occupy thespace, way of representing it, ornamentation that they choose for that, etc. All theseconcretions permit to articulate the thought of a community, and encode its socialspeech, within a culture and a certain historical moment.

Notably, the visual representations of the human body have madepossible the speech articulation that reproduces visually the power (PULTZ, 7) notonly through gestures, garments, and attributes, but also through themetonymic projection that they accomplish of the authority portray as the head of the socialbody and of the rest of the groups or classes as the rest of the organs thatdevelop the different social functions.

Therefore, the pictorial portrays constitute one of the cultural devicesthat more efficiently permit to represent, propagate, persuade, indoctrinate, and eventransgress the established power, and that better visually testify through manyiconographic representation strategies such as metaphors, allegories, parodies,caricatures, etc. the social order in which they are produced.


7/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

In fact, each political regimen monarchy, republic, dictatorship,democracy, etc. creates a typology of typical artistic themes and a specific system

of iconographic codes to represent, summon, indoctrinate or intimidate the people itcontrols.

Both the ancient empires and the classic tyrannies, the modernmonarchic dynasties, the military dictatorships, and even the contemporarydemocracies, have clearly established, inside their political rituals, the iconographicprograms with those they communicate the goodness of their respective politicalsystems.

Within their cultural context and historical age, each one of them tries

to intentionally associate with repertories of prestigious visual motives, composed byidentifier spaces and scenographies, as well as emblematic attributes significant forthe social memory of each people.

Thus, pre-established iconographic formulas are built and transmittedalong extensive chronological periods such as those that are peculiar of the portrayof apparatus, courting, equestrian, authority, cabinet, etc. that permit emphasize theattributes of different social archetypes recognized as the monarch, the prince, thearistocrat, the statesman, the military hero, the religious, the intellectual, the artist,the dilettante, the bourgeois businessman, the farmer, the familiar patriarch, etc.

3 THE DECODING OF ARTISTIC IMAGES

The multiplicity of communicative elements that interfere, as well asthe richness and diversity of the codes that are used in their articulation, make thestudy of the artistic images to provide numerous and very interesting pieces ofinformation about the value system, the power mechanisms, the social structures, theeconomical flows, the habits, the material culture, the conflicts, etc. of the culture inwhich those artistic images are developed.

This study requires the formulation of a semantic analysis processthat decodes and reads the artistic message speech, considering the information


8/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

transference processes, the communicative intentionality, and the respectivecontexts of emission and reception of the messages (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Decoding of the artistic images.

That content analysis operates in three successive levels:


9/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

1. Firstly, it is engaged in studying the respective contexts ofemission and reception of the artistic image, its intentionality and

its pragmatism. Definitely, it analyzes the emission and receptionof its artistic works, including the author, the mediators, and theusers, responding specially to the problem of the uses andfunctions of the pictorial works that will eventually determine therecuperation necessities.

2. Secondly, it studies the artistic image as a heaver of atransferring process of knowledge in which a lot of informationabout the people, objects, actions, events, and represented

places are transmitted.3. Finally, in third place, it analyzes the image as arealization of a

semiotic system, a code of signs that, in the most part of thecases, transcends the artistic message itself and that is related tothe ideological, political, economical, social, religious, etc.systems proper from each culture and each historical epoch.

Effectively, the pictorial language combines a semiotic system thatacts in long, medium and short term. That system possesses very varied elements,from the ones that are anchored in the collective unconsciousness and the civilizationhistory, to the ideo-languages that are product of the authors very personalcreation.

Deciphering and organizing this set of significations is necessary tocreate documental products that permit, afterwards, to obtain a precise, exhaustive,and controlled recuperation, within the necessities of the potential users of thediverse artistic information systems.

4 THE ARTISTIC IMAGES WITHIN THE INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Yet, in order to enable the artistic images to develop within theinformation systems in equality of conditions relating to any other support or


10/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

documental kind, it is necessary that the Documentation Sciences admit them insidetheir list of study objects.

It is known that the scientific study of the iconic speeches has beenhistorically disregarded.

At the same time, the documental information processing systemshave historically privileged the linguistic communication logical, conceptual andabstract - in detriment of the iconic communication forms expressive, emotional andconcrete.

The reasons that explain the preponderance of the verbalcommunication and, consequently, of the textual documents and their logical-

linguistic speeches are out of reach and intention of this present work, though, it isimportant to specify that this historical process of documental specialization left theiconic speech to the mass communication, while it privileged the verbal speech to thepower assignment and the political, economical, and scientific reflection, sacrificing,thus, the expressive potential of the iconic documents.

The historical combination of the documental information systems, aswell as the methodologies of textual analysis impressively reflected theunderestimate of the informative value of the iconic documents.

Therefore, it was necessary that the communicational paradigm thatimpregnates the western science since mid-Twentieth century noticed that the artisticobjects have a primordial communicative intentionality, and that each artistic image isan entity revealing of significations that interchange with the spectator of that work,so that the Documentation Sciences, having support in the semioticconceptualization ofartistic object as a set of nets of significations interlaced under the form of codes , are able to consider that the artistic works are organized as visualtexts whose speeches can be submitted to semantic analysis processes, thatsubsequently will give place to different documental products.

This epistemological contribution coming from Semiotics reaches alarge relevance to the Documentation Sciences, because it enables that thoseconsider the artistic works as cultural products whose documental value can beconverted to their study object.


11/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

It also makes possible that, conveniently adapting themethodologies, techniques, procedures, and tools successfully tested about the

textual documents, the Documentation Sciences can successfully occupy inanalyzing, representing, and diffusing, under normalized documental regulations, theanalyses they make about the artistic images.

Exactly because of all reasons mentioned above, it is so important toprecisely delineate which has been the theoretical itinerary through which theDocumentation Sciences have discoursed, in order to join the Semiotics and totransfer the concept of artistic text from its knowing.

Clarifying in a detailed way and systematizing the formulation

process of that concept is a task of great transcendence to our science, and also thecommitment of the following quotations of this work.

5 THE SEMIOTICS AS GENERAL SCIENCE OF ALL SIGNS

The Semiotics conceived as general theory of the signs, science ofthe significations related to the social and cultural processes (GREIMAS, p. 27), or aswell as science of all production modes of the signs (ECO, p. 321-325) includesamong its study objects the artistic works understood as systems of signs orsignification of aesthetic nature. That is to say, for the Semiotics, the works of artconstitute a language whose signs maintain an arbitrary or conventional relationship,at least between a plastic signification and/or figurative and a cultural meaning.

However, in the context of Semiotics, investigation chains anddifferent schools3, which center their attention in diverse aspects and that, in goodsize, give place to different conceptions of the artistic sign, live together. It happens,

3 Principally the linguistic Semiology integrated by F. de Saussure, L. Hjelmslev, V. Mathesis, R.Jakobson ; the Peircian Semiotics Ch. S. Peirce, T. A. Sebeok, M. H. Fisch, K. O. Apel, C. J. W.Kloesel, G. Deledalle; the Tart-Mosc school J. M. Lotman, B. A. Uspenski ; the Paris school A. J. Greimas ; the Toronto circle; the text Linguistics T. V. Dijk, H. Isenberg, E. Coseriu, Z.Harris, etc.


12/32


13/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

+

Such difference of approach implies that, according to the manifest of the Italianteacher Omar Calabrese4, two big choices difficult the development of a Semiotics of

the visual arts.The first one is related to theiconism problem, and the second one

concerns the difficulties of the existence in the ambit of the artistic images of thedouble articulation proper of all signic systems.

While the last problem worries preferentially the semiology, thetheme of iconism constitutes one of the main interest centers of the semioticapproaches.

6.1 The Double Articulation and Arbitrariness of the Sign

Saussure determined that the Semiology should be articulatedaccording to the model of system that the Linguistics5 had proposed. He understoodthe linguistic sign as an ideal entity composed by two inseparable elements signification and significance that maintain a relation of arbitrary character betweeneach other, that is, established in the center of a certain community, for convention.None of the two elements have independent existence, and because of that, only inthe center of the system they reach their value through an opposition system, inwhich each sign is defined by the place it occupies in relation to the other signs.

Thus, in the semiological conception of sign, Saussure consideredthat the two typical features werearbitrariness and opposition .

4 That is a recurrent idea in different works of Calabrese, O.Semiotica della pittura.Miln: IlSaggiatores, 1980; La machina della pittura.Bari: Laterza, 1985 and;El lenguaje del arte .Barcelona: Paidos, 1987, etc.

5 In the workCourse in General Linguistics , posthumously published in 1916 by the students ofFerdinand de Saussure about his annotations and notes of classes, it is established that theLinguistics for being the science in which the most typical features of any sign are bestrepresented should serve as a model for the development of the other sciences that undertake thedifferent kinds of signs.About the relationships between Linguistics and Semiology see Saussure, F. de.Curso de Lingstica General , published by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye with the cooperation of AlbertRiedlinger. Madrid: Akal, 1980. Universitaria; 1, p. 42-44.


14/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

*

About those two premises, along the Thirties and Forties in theTwentieth century, the Semiology experienced a very notable development in the

chains called Russian Formalism and Prague Circle.Within the last one, it was distinguished the input of the Czech author

Jan Mukarovsky (1891-1974), who wrote, in 1936,Art as Semiological Fact , wherehe defined the work of art as an autonomous and social sign as a structure thatserves to the communication among individuals.

Mukarovsky elaborated his aesthetic theory with fundaments about aconception of the artistic work as significant unity in which the physical object is thesignificance of a sign, whose formal analysis reveals the signification of the work

inside a community. In his theory, the social and extra-aesthetic factors acquired vitalimportance because they were also signification carriers, and, therefore, they werepart of the content.

In the Sixties, the application of the Saussarian notion of sign from anew perspective in the ambit of the plastic arts was carried on, especially for theinitiative of the feminist criticism and the post-structuralist criticism.

Thanks to the French approach of philosophers like Michel Foucault(1926-1984), and of semiologists like Roland Barthes6 (1915-1980), it was created anopportunity for the idea that the image is a sign, and as such, it is registered in asignification system. That implies considering that the relationship with itssignificance is arbitrary or at least conventional and, secondly, that it only meansby opposition to other signs, whatever their nature.

6 Clearly, the input of the French Roland Barthes (1915-1980) has been one of the most determinantones for the development of Semiology in the Twentieth century. The evolution of his thought iscaptured in works such as Elements of Semiology (1964); Rethoric of the image (1964); The fashionsystem (1967); S/Z (1970); The pleasure of the text (1973); Mitologies (1975), and The lucid camera(1980). Throughout his production the transit is observed from some semiological postulates initiallyof a Saussurian root to his last stage, in which he sets the structuralist model aside, to formulate aSemiotics of the text, understood as the place of the revolution against the language and the shape.One of his most distinguished inputs was the reformulation of the connotation and denotationconcepts taken from the Danish linguist Hjelmslev and his application to the analysis of thecultural manifestations. According to the French semiologist the first content of a sign is itsdenotation, while the other contents that could associate to its shape are part of its connotation.Along the Seventies, he substituted the concept of sign and language by the concept of text,claiming, thus, the possibility of producing signs beyond codes, forcing the rules and theconventional nature proper from the language.


15/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

)

With their inputs, those theoreticians notably contributed to theunderstanding of the artistic sign nature, because they achieved to clarify that the

traditional denial of the semiotic nature of the artistic image responds to reasons ofideological character, since it intends to show as natural what is, in fact, cultural, andbecause they consider that all the semiotic structure constitutes a real powerstructure.

The Barthesian conception of artistic sign has resulted as veryproductive within the scientific community, so that, at the present moment, differentspecialists like the teachers Mieke Bal7 and Norman Bryson8 are accomplishing

7 Mieke Bal (1946- ) is a cathedratic of Theory of Literature at University of Amsterdam, and directorand founder of the Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis. Her works are oriented towards thetheory of literature, the visual arts, and the culture analysis, and joins in them the semiotic andfeminist perspectives.She is the author of, with Norman Bryson, two works that reached great repercussion; the articleSemiotics and Art History (1991) published in the prestigious magazine Art Bulletin, and morerecenlty the monography Looking in: The art of viewing (2001).Her individual production is very extensive, and in it we can distinguish works such as Narratologie:Essais sur la signification narrative dans quatre romans modernes (1977); Theory of narrative: Anintroduction to the narratology (1985); Femmes imaginaires: L Ancient testament au risque de unenarratologie critique (1986); Lethal love: feminist literary readings of biblical love stories (1987);Death and dissymmetry: The politics of coherence inthe Book of Judges (1988); Murder and difference: gender, genre and scholarship on Siseras death (1988);Anti-covenant: Counter-reading

womens lives in the Hebrew Bible (1989); Reading 'Rembrandt': Beyond the word and image opposition (1991); On story-telling. Essays in narratology (1991);On meaning-making. Essays in Semiotics (1994);The point of theory. Practices of cultural analysis (1994);Double exposures: The subject of cultural analysis (1996); The mottled screen. Reading Proust visually (1997); Seeing signs: The use of Semiotics for the understanding of visual art (1998); The practice of cultural analysis: Exposing interdisciplinary interpretation (1999); Acts of memory: Cultural recall in the present (1999); Quoting Caravaggio. Contemporary art, preposterous history (1999); Louise Bourgeois Spider: The architecture of art-writing (2001); andTravelling concepts in the humanities: A rough guide (2002).

8 Norman Bryson (1949- ) is cathedratic of History and Theory of art at University of Cambridge, andhe has taught at prestigious North American, Japanese, Germany, and Danish universities.His works are oriented towards a conception of pictorial art, more as a system of visual signs than ofperceptions. His theory is one that confronts the Gombrichian perceptualism, in so far as that oneconceives to the spectator as an immutable and out of context presence inside the knowledgetransmission process that every art presupposes, though it is also critic with the precisian raisings ofthe structuralism of Saussurian root.Having the analysis of nature of the visual representation as the starting point, he understands thatthe painting constitutes a sign system in continuous contact with other systems, exterior of it, butthat are attached to it. Those implicit cultural codes affect not only the painting conception but alsothe one of a particular gender, the spectator role facing the image, and the own consideration of thepresented objects.Among his works it is possible to distinguish:Word and image: French painting of the Ancient Regime (1981);Teaching the text (1983);Vision and painting: The logic of the gaze (1983);Tradition and desire: From David to Delacroix (1984); Calligram: Essays in new art history from France (1988); Looking at the overlooked: Four essays on still life painting (1990);Anselm Kiefer and art


16/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

having it as the starting point interesting semiotic applications to the analysis of thevisual culture, with concrete applications in painting, literature, etc.

From a large perspective, the pictorial works understand essentiallythe trestle ones as signs inside the ones that different signification systems act, sothat they proceed to interpret the images relating them to signs of all characters,including the verbal signs.

Bryson (BRYSON, p. 70-80) is supported by R. Barthess theories todeny any possibility of natural denotation of the pictorial image. He understands that,in that one, the reality effect consists of a special relation between denotation andconnotation, in which the connotation confirms and proves the denotation until the

point that this one seems to reach the level of truth.

6.2 The Peircian concept of sign and the iconism theme

One of the most interesting approaches of the multifaceted NorthAmerican philosopher and scientist Charles S. Peirce9 is the consideration that

after Auschwitz (1990); In Medusa`s gaze: Still life paintings from upstate New York museums (1991);Visual culture: Images and interpretations (1994);Images visual and culture interpretations (1994); Sexuality in ancient art (1996); Inside/out: New Chinese art (1998);Villas and gardens in early modern Italy and France (2001); Gender and power in the Japanese visual field (2003) yManet, Flaubert and the emergence of modernism: Blurring genre boundaries (2004).

9 The North American Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914) is one of the most relevant and originalfigures of the contemporaneous scientific thought. He has been considered as the founder of thephilosophical Pragmatism and father of the present Semiotics, understood as a philosophical theoryof the signification and the representation. His figure has also acquired a notable relief in sciencesas Astronomy, Geodesy, Mathematics, Logic, Theory and History of Science, Semiotics,Econometrics, Psicology, and Philosophy, throughout the Twentieth century. He was born in themiddle of a family of intelectuals and scientists, and he studied Mathematics, Physics andAstronomy since he was very young. After graduating in Chemistry at Harvard University in 1863, heworked for thirty years as an investigation assistant atthe Coast and Geodetic Survey in the UnitedStates. During that time he investigated about the pendular measurements of gravity and intensity ofthe starlight, and he made approaches of great interest in many scientific ambits.He also had a great interest for Philosophy and Logic, and in spite of not developing an academicalcareer, he taught those subjects between 1879 and 1784 at the Johns Hopkins University.The work of Charles S. Peirce is characterized by its extension and deepness. He produced a largeamount of writings, of very varied nature and themes, making approaches of singular interest inpractically all the areas he approached. He published numerous articles, recensions, dictionary


17/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

anything can be a sign, for what it is only necessary to use it like one, and that it issusceptible of interpreting.

His conception of the sign is previous and much richer than theSaussurian, since it is formulated as a triadic relation in which arepresentamen object that is in the place of something else, that is to say, a sign interferes aselements; its object the object or represented reality and aninterpretative arelationship that the interpreter updates between the first and the second element.

The nature of the relationship between the representamen and itsobject is calledsignic function , and according to it, the signs are presented in threekinds: symbols, indexes and icons.

A symbol is a sign whose interpretative is arbitrary. It supposes thatthe relationship between the sign and its object is a law whose lack of knowledgemakes the interpretation of the symbol not possible.

The index is a kind of sign in which the relationship between this oneand its object is causal. The interpretative can infer the knowledge of the sign and theobject and, on the other hand, the interpretation rule consists of the recognition ofsuch causal relationship.

terms, etc. for economical reasons, and also some works of scientific character, asPhotometric Researches (1878) andStudies in Logic (1883).Since 1887, he dedicated himself to write busily about Logic and Philosophy, correcting himselfoccasionally. In that period, he editted the most part of the 80.000 pages of manuscripts that he leftunpublished until his death, and that his wife sold to Harvard University.Among the most distinguished approaches of his thought is possible the sign triadic conception,previous and much richer than the Saussurian semiological proposal; the development of a theory ofcreativity linked to his own experience and to the human action, and the abduction concept, centralnot only for his science philosophy but also for all his work.The Peircean philosophy has a deep metaphysical tradition. In it one can find theories like theobjective idealism or its cosmology of evolutionist cut. It established a new list of categories firstness, secondness, thirdness that support his thought, and specially his philosophicalSemiotics, because the sign, and according to himthe whole is a sign , could not be understoodwithout the characteristical mediation of thirdness.On the other hand, his Pragmatism that later was denominated Pragmaticism conceived initially asa logical method to clarify the signification of the concepts was converted to the dominatingphilosophical movement in America of the late Nineteenths and early Twentieth centuries.The thought of Peircese was frequently labeled as oscure, because of the difficult access to hiswritings and to the marked evolutive character of his thought. However, in the last years, thesystematicity of his work has been put in evidence, since it has been editted attending tocronological criteria.


18/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

In the case of the icon , the relationship between the sign and itsobject is of similarity, analogy or likeness.

The literary texts and the works of art are very powerful signs,because they behave like macro-signs, in which the interpretative, on the other hand,can be converted to a new signad infinitum . In them, the so calledproblem of iconism reaches recognition. This one is originated from the vague word similarity,to refer to the signic function in which the icon represents to its object in virtue of itsown characters.

The catenation of the signs is calledunlimited semiosis and impliesthat the interpretation, in theory, never finalizes, since no sign representamen

directly represents its object, nor it is in the place of another thing without more ado,but that is in its place through an interpretation rule of an interpretative and thatinterpretative, on the other hand, must necessarily be another sign.

In this context, Peirce understands the painting with an eminentlyiconic nature, while he considers how every material image is very conventional in itsmanner of representation.

For the North American philosopher, the artistic image is a macro-sign integrated by signs, of a diverse nature: Among the principal symbols thatoperate in the artistic signification system one can find the comprehension of thespatial deepness inside a flat surface; the recognition of some changes of color,having the ability to understand them as shadows or as volume expressions; the factthat obviates the discretionary nature of the brushstrokes on the handkerchief, easilydiscriminated seen from the proximity and, however, noticed homogeneously from acertain distance; and the most important of all, referred to the fact of considering thepainting not as a handkerchief with spots, but as a sign of another thing.

On the other hand, one of the principal indexes is the perspective.Although it is not possible to understand the Semiotics of Peirce only

as a protocol of sign interpretation, this one results very effective to describe theartistic experience, and very notably the painting, as a semiotic experience, that is,as an elucidation mode.

According to his phenomenology, denominated Phaneroscopy, the


19/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,,

aesthetic experience is an experience of the merely sensitive and ineffable. Theiconic is considered a variant of the primerity a category of being and a form of

knowledge and as an aesthetic category it identifies with the pure sensation, thequality of feeling, also including the aesthetic feelings.

7 THE CONDUCTOR APPROACH OF CH. W. MORRIS TO THE DEFINITION OFTHE ARTISTIC SIGN AND THE APPEARANCE OF THE AESTHETICSEMIOTICS

The formulation of a semiotic Aesthetic as well as the division of the

theory of the signs inSyntactic , dedicated to the study of the sign in relation to othersigns; Semantics, engaged in the analysis of the signs in relation to the representedobjects; and Pragmatism , centered in the relation between the signs and theirinterpreters, including all the psychological, biological and sociological phenomena,are two of the main approaches accomplished by the semiotician conductor CharlesW. Morris10 (1903-1979).

Having the triadic definition of the sign elaborated by Peirce as thestarting point, Morris reformulated the semiosical process from an essentiallybehavioral perspective, according to which the signs are not merely representative

10 The North American semiotician Charles William Morris (1903-1979) graduated at NorthwesternUniversity and later got his doctorate at Chicago University, institution where he developed a big partof his teaching and investigative career, until he transfered to the University of Florida, already at hiselderly period of life. His work was initially situated inside the chains of logical positivism next to theVienna Circle, and he actively participated in theUnity of Science Movement that gave place to theso called Scientism . His friendship with numerous Austrian and German philosophers was decisiveto their escape towards the United States in the beginning of the Second World War.Among his principal works it is possible to distinguishSymbolism and reality; a study in the nature of mind (1925); Foundations of the theory of signs (1938); Signs, language, and behavior (1955);Signification and significance; a study of the relations of signs and values (1964);The pragmatic movement in American philosophy (1970); Writings on the general theory of signs (1971), andLogical positivism, pragmatism, and scientific empiricism (1979).His theories about the work of art as a sign, the aesthectic perception, the iconism, and thesignificative values of art have an indubitable Peircian root and are captured in two articlespublished in 1939 Science, art and technology.Kenyon Review . 1939, 1, p. 419-423 and Estheticsand the theory of signs.Erkenntnis . 1939, 8, p.131-150 and another one, fourteen years later Significance, signification, and paintings.Methodos . 1953, 5, p. 87-102. His complete bibliography iscompiled in the collective work,Symbolism and Reality Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1993, p.107-122.


20/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

realities, but their fundamental characteristic is that they operate in a mannersufficiently similar to the reality they substitute.

The elements that compose the sign are denominatedsignic vehicle the stimulus that operates as a sign ;designatum represented by the sign andinterpretative the disposition of an interpreter to answer, in favor of the sign,through a series of answers of a certain family of conduct. It understands thesemiosis as a situation in which the sign behaves as a preparatory stimulus thatprovokes in the interpreter an answer similar to the one it would experience in thepresence of the implied object.

Another one of his relevant approaches is the establishment of one

of the first typologies of speech, answering to the way of meaning designate,appreciative, prescriptive and formative and to the use of the signs informative,evaluative, incitive and systemic.

Morris characterizes the art beside science and technology asthe language that enables the communication of values. The aesthetic speech isvaluative before being informative, so that the artist tries to provoke a valuativeconduct in the interpreter, a preferential selection for the designated objects. Incontraposition to the scientific speech, and in a similar way to the manner ofdeveloping of the fiction speech and of the poetic speech, the truth or falsehood ofthe narrated facts is not important. The specificity of the artistic deed is completedconsidering, besides the specific traits, the exhibitive value of the artistic signs, onthe one hand, and, by the other hand, the creation of a special kind of conduct in theinterpreter, the aesthetic perception.

Morriss works constitute the first explicit intent to formulate asemiotic Aesthetics. They identify the artistic sign with the work of art. They consider,in a strict sense, that this one only acquires recognition through a semiosical processof interpretation, denominatedaesthetic perception . Interpreting an aesthetic signconsists of noticing the values that reside in an iconic sign. That is, an aesthetic signis an icon that designates values. However, it also considers that the signs thatappear in the aesthetic perception have no reason to be exclusively iconic, no reasonto be limited to only one signification dimension, and no reason to be assigned a


21/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

primary use such as the valuative one.Another of his interesting contributions is the intent of systematizing

and defining the concept of iconism, understanding it as similarity. From thisperspective the iconism is related to a matter of degree, since it is defined by thepossession of some properties common to the sign and to itsdesignatum . Thus, ifthe aesthetic icon denotes values, those are apprehended directly in the sign.However, a value is not something merely objective, or subjective, but relative to therelationship between the subject and the object. That explains the diversity of judgments facing a work of art, due to the different value that the spectators attributeto it, to the importance that they effectively have while they satisfy the necessities

that are not universal, etc.

8 TOWARDS THE CONCEPT OF AESTHETIC TEXT OF UMBERTO ECO

Besides a great systematizer of the science of signs understood as ascientific theory of the culture, Umberto Eco11 is one of the real impellers of the

11 The Italian communicologist, semiotician, medievalist, critic and writer Umberto Eco (1932 - ) isone of the most relevant intelectuals in the European thought since the second part of the Twentiethcentury. He started his formation at the University of Turin studying Law, but he ended enchanted bymedieval Philosophy and Literature. In 1954 he got his doctorate in Philosophy with a thesis entitledThe Aesthetics of Thomas Aquinas,directed by the teacher Luigi Pareyson.Between 1954 and 1959 he worked as an editor of cultural programs for the R. A. I., and he couldknow the culture from the perspective of the means of communication. Subsequently, he hassuccessively been teacher of Aesthetics, Audiovisual Communication and Semiotics at theuniversities of Turin, Milan, Florence and Bologna. He has dictated conferences and courses at themost prestigious European and American, he has been literary editor for the company Bompiani; hehas directed magazines such as VS-Quaderni de studi semiotici and also has been founder,president and presently secretary of theInternational Association for Semiotic Studies . In February2000, he created the University School of Humanistic Studies in Bologna, academic initiativedestinated to difunding the universal culture. His initial works, such asIl problema estetico in Tommaso d'Aquino (1956); Sviluppo dellestetico medievale (1959) and Le poetische di Joyce: dall "summa" al "Finnegans Wake" (1966), werededicated to the study of the medieval aesthetics and literary criticism. From his stay at theUniversity of Milan he started remodifying his interest for the medieval aesthectics towards thecultural values and the literature in general, once he started to systematize his semiotic theories.During those years, he published his first important studies in this subject, such asOpen Work (1962); Apocalyptic and integrated ones in the face of a mass culture (1964) and The absent structure (1968). The last one was completely revised throughout eight and published under the newtitle ofA Theory of Semiotics (1975). It constitutes the core of all his thought, since his theories


22/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

development of the Semiotic Aesthetics. His theoreticalcorpus is situated in anintermediate zone between the philosophical-semiotic theories of Peircian root, and

the European linguistic-structuralist ones.In this sense, his monographyOpen Work (1962) represents well

this mystifying capacity, because he uses methodological instruments coming fromthe formalism and the structural linguistic, joining them to another precedent from thetheory of information and the experimental theory of perception. However, the mainapproach Eco accomplishes in that work is his intent to define the communicativenature of the work of art, inserting it in a general theory of the signs.

In that work one of his key-theories about art is included,

comprehending that the artistic work is constituted as a fundamentally self-reflexivemessage that explicitly searches the ambiguity as preferential value. In this sense,the model of open work that he propounds is an abstraction, linked to a form topropose the artistic problem, not as a critical category, but as an operative tendencypresent in different ideological and cultural contexts (CALABRESE 1995, p. 120-121).

That idea will be retaken in posterior works, and, once rethought itwill contribute to the development of his aesthetic of interpretation. His studies aboutthat theme approach from the first academic applications of his doctoral thesis to theanalysis of the experimental languages of the contemporaneous art, and they aresynthesized in the monographyThe definition of art (1968). His starting point is theconception that the work of art transmits a message that is ambiguous and open tothe subjectivity of the interpretation and plurality of significations. The work,understood as an aesthetic text, conduces to an interpretation work, of semantic

about the codes, the cultural organization of the significant systems, and the production of the signsare articulated in it, since he includes a typology of the production ways of the signs.He is also the author ofThe definition of art (1968); Forme del contenuto (1971); Dalla periferia dell'impero (1977);Lector in fabula (1979); Semiotics and the philosophy of language (1984);Of mirrors and other essays (1985); The limits of interpretation (1990); The Search for the Perfect Language (1993);Six walks in the fictional woods (1994);Kant and the platypus (1997);Five moral pieces (1997);Tra menzogna e ironia (1998), andLa bustina di Minerva (2000).Simultaneously to his works about Semiotics, Eco has developed an interesting career as acolumnist in numerous newspapers Il giorno , La Stampa , Corriere della Sera , La Repubblica ,LEspresso y Il Manifiesto and also as a novelist.


23/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,+

projection, of cooperation of the spectator-reader. It also introduces in its theoreticalformulation the figure of the ideal reader conceived as that one who is capable of

decoding the message in the same terms in which the author12

produced it.In Theory of Semiotics (1975) he undertakes among other

questions the most characteristic aspect of his aesthetic formulation, that is, thecriticism to the notion of icon, that develops in a double direction: In first place,putting in evidence the lack of objective criteria to establish the concept ofsimilarity , and secondly, identifying under the common denomination of iconic signs verydifferent classes of signic phenomena. His objective is to substitute the notion of iconby another one, free of the problems that have traditionally associated to that one,

although without denying that certain classes of signs, basically the images, arehardly reduced to the structures of the linguistic signs.

His starting point is to consider that the problems raised by theconcept of icon are due to, in great part, a deficient conceptualization of the genericidea of sign. If a sign acquires such condition through a semiotic process, so thedescriptive typology of the signs must be abandoned and substituted by a typology ofthe ways of production of the signs . Eco elaborates that typology considering fourparameters (ECO 1988, p. 325-373). The physical work required signs produced byrecognition, obtainment, reproduction or invention ; the relationship between kindand specimen signs obtained byratio facilis or byratio difficilis ; thecontinuum forconstituting heteromaterial or homomaterial signs and, finally, observing themanner or the complexity of the articulation from the hyper-codified signs to thehypo-codified ones.

For Eco, even in the images there are conventional relationships,and including arbitrary ones, neither all of them are like this, nor the arbitrary onesare clearly discernible from the motivated ones. The reason is that there are not,even inside the same community, minimal signification unities, and, thus, there is nota code that can be analyzed.

12 The analysis of the distinct contexts in which the relationships between the author-artist and thereader-spectator are produced, as well as the nature of such relationships, is a theme that appearsrecurrently in many Ecos works, very specially in his workThe limits of interpretation (1990).


24/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,*

The images are, according to him, cases ofhypo-codified texts ,produced by invention, and in which the relationship between expression and content

is motivated. In this sense, they move away from other signs, such as the linguistic,arbitrarily codified. However, in the interpretation of the figurative images, at least twocodes culturally established concur (ECO 1988, p. 311-314): Arecognition code ,which works in the perception of the world, and the minimal pertinent properties thatmust possess an object to be recognized, and, therefore, considered as so. Insecond place, an iconic representation code , which links certain graphic artifices tothe pertinent properties of the recognition code, acts. That iconic code is defined(ECO 1988, p. 314) as the system that causes a correspondence of perceptive and

cultural codified or even pertinent unities of a semantic system that depends on aprevious codification of the perceptive experience to a system of graphic vehicles.

For every semiotician, the aesthetic text constitutes a field of study ofgreat value, because in it the different ways of production of the signs are expressed,and it constitutes ametasemiotic insight (ECO 1988, p. 374-375) about the futurenature of the codes in which it is based.

The aesthetic text characterized from the peculiarities of the literarytext, but equally applicable to other artistic texts is considered a product of aparticular work, that is, as a manipulation of the expression that is provoked and, onthe other hand, provokes a readjustment of the content and a process of exchangingthe code that induces an exchange in the world vision. In his or her way, thetransmitter of the aesthetic text, to the extent he or she aspires to stimulate in thereceiver a complex interpretative work, focuses his or her attention towards thepossible reactions, so that such text represents a net of communicative acts,instructed to provokeoriginal answers (ECO 1988, p. 374-375).

9 THE SEMIOTICS OF THE PICTORIAL TEXT


25/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,)

Inside the fertile Italian semiotic school that Umberto Eco has createdaround himself, the figure of Omar Calabrese13 is distinguished, one of the main

approaches was to substitute the concept ofSemiotics of painting by the concept ofSemiotics of the pictorial text .

For Calabrese, the notion oftext results especially productive to thesemiotic investigation in recent times, because under its definition it is possible toinclude both tales and novels and advertising messages, photographs, theatricalrepresentations, movies, and also the works of art14.

However, the textual analysis has been applied to the artistic ambitsince recent times. It lacks, therefore, a complete theory of visual text, what explains

that its operative concepts are debtors of its eldest application field, the literary text.It takes as the starting point a generic notion (CALABRESE 1995, p.

177-179) that considers as text every communicative entity noticed as self-sufficientand characterized by a functioning that Eco compares to a semantic-pragmatic

13 Omar Calabrese (1949 - ) is an important Italian semiotician and communicologist. He has beenteacher of Theory of Communication at the University of Milan, and he presenlty teaches Semiotics

of art and spectacle at the University of Siena. He has participated in numerous courses inprestigious American and European universities. Currently, he is the president of theFundacin Mediateca , of the Associazione Italiana Studi Semiotici and director of the magazineCarte semiotiche. He usually publishes articles of analysis and opinion in Italian neswpapers, such asCorriere della Sera .

His bibliographic production has been translated to many languages and discusses about questions ofSemiotics, History and Critics of art, means of communication, etc. Among his principals works it ispossible to distinguish:Semiotica della pittura (1980);La Macchina della pittura: Pratiche teoriche della rappresentazione figurativa fra rinascimento e barocco (1985); Il linguaggio dell'arte (1985);L'et neobarocca (1987); Caos e bellezza: Immagini del neobarocco (1991); Mille di questi anni (1992); La ricerca semiotica (1993); Serio ludere: Sette serissimi scherzi semiotici (1993); Il Telegiornale: istruzioni per l'uso (1995);Come nella boxe: Lo spettacolo della politica in Tv (1998);Il modello italiano: le forme della creativit (1999);Lezioni di semisimbolico (1999);Breve storia della semiotica. Dai Presocratici a Hegel (2001) andBizzarramente: Eccentrici e stravaganti dal mondo antico alla modernita (2002).

14 O. Calabrese inEl lenguaje del arte.Paids: Barcelona, 1995. Instrumentos Paids; 1, p. 13-14,considers that the study field of the Semiotics is very large: It is possible to say that the Semioticshas in front of it an extremely wide intervention field: It will undertake the animal language (startingfrom a limit in the cultural to a superior and complex limit), of the tactile communication, of thesystems of taste, of the paralinguistics, of the medical Semiotics, of kinesics and proxemics(gestures, postures, distances), of the formalized languages (algebra, logic; chemistry, for example),of the writing systems, of the musical systems, of the natural languages, of the visualcommunications, of the narrative and textual grammar, of the logic of the presuppositions, of theculture typology, of the aesthetics, of the mass communications, of the ideological systems. Of all, ifwanted. But always from the point of view of the communication and the signification.


26/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

machine that needs to be updated in an interpretative process, and whosegeneration rules coincide to its own interpretation rules.

About the concept of text, a new formulation of the method ofsemiotic analysis of the works of art, whose main innovations are synthesized in fouraspects, is developed:

Firstly, the pictorial texts are studied through an analytical movementthat progresses from the biggest levels, theconfigurations , to the smallest ones, thedenominated minimal unities , without damaging any level of analysis. That newapproach is able to detain the unproductive analysis centered in the minimal unities,as well as the eternal interrogation about the systemic character of art.

Secondly, it permits to recuperate the sense of historicity of thecodes because it considers that an artistic text is alwaysa-text-in-history.

The third advantage consists that the notion of text permits toovercome the problem of the referent of the visual signs, which gives up beingepistemological and converts to purely strategic, to the extent that the electedperspective is the organization of the textual machine from the optics of theinterpretative cooperation.

Finally, the notion of text permits to abandon the unproductive searchof the artisticspecifics , since Calabrese considers that it is not possible to interpreteach text, independently of the material support with which it has been created, as aself-sustained reality, but as an entity that continuously demands other texts, otherexperiences of the reader and the author.

Under that theory of the text underlies the idea of substituting aSemiotics of the codes , the one of the dictionary, by aSemiotics of the encyclopedia 15. The reasons are double: The confirmation that the artistic images donot allow themselves to be fragmented in minimal signification unities, and, secondly,the strictness of the notion of code.

15 Having some ideas drawn by his master, U. Eco, as the staring point, Calabrese develops byopposition to the concept of dictionary, understood as a model of the ideal competences of an idealspeaker, the concept of encyclopedia, understood as a model of the socialized competence at acertain historical moment. See Calabrese, O.Op. cit.,p. 44, 177-178.


27/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

For Calabrese a text is a unity of signification that is structured indifferent levels, each one of them constitutes a stage of analysis, a recurrence of

reading, denominatedisotopy . Each reading level of a text serves to submit a unity ofsense, whose validity serves only to that text.

He applies and develops the theories of his teacher16 and performs,under those suppositions, the analysis of Holbeins painting, The Young Man,The Ambassadors , painted in London, in 1533. He establishes that that work is a textconstructed in nine levels or isotopies17, in each one of them, some knowledge ofencyclopedic kind permits to relate elements of that text to others and, thus, tointerpret it.

He considers that, in every pictorial text, eachvisible materialelement brushstroke, stroke, spatula hit, texture, etc. is always significant.

However, it is impossible to typify a canonic repertory ofbrushstrokes, strokes, textures, colors, etc., that could constitute a set of oppositions,universally valid to all the painting system.

CONCLUSIONS

The semiotic notions ofartistic text and pictorial text formulated by U.Eco and O, Calabrese have shown a great theoretical potency and instrumentalcapacity sufficient to conceptualize each artistic image as a communicative structure

16 Basically, he makes his the proposal of Umberto Eco inLector in fbula,where he provided apragmatic definition of isotopy as an answer to the question about the text content.

17 In the first level, the painting is presented as a secret related to the skull situated in the first end.The second isotopy is related to the identity of the characters. The third one remits to the culturaluniverse in which the facts are developed the scientific and religious Reform. The fourth readingstage refers to the friendship existing among the depicted characters and other four mentionedpreviously Nicols Kratzer, Toms Moro and Erasmo de Rotterdam, and the painter himself. Thefifth level is related to the political hapennings that explain the painting the mission of theambassadors was to avoid the rupture between the anglican and roman churches. The sixth stage isthe painting itself: The text is shown as an application of the theory of painting as a mistake. Theseventh level resides in the linguistic game about death, from the presence of many skulls and of aword game with the name Holbein in ancient German. The eighth level is of autobiographic nature,since it relates all the previous elements to the artists biography. The last stage is philosophical, since it relates the elements of the other levels from the perspective of truth and lie, the secret anddeath.


28/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

systemically organized and characterized by a functioning, that is updated in aninterpretative process, whose generation rules coincide with its own interpretation

rules, permitting to approach its structures, in successive levels of complexity, toordinate and interpret them.

That conceptual input has important implications to theDocumentation Sciences, because it supposes, in fact, to consider that each artisticimage is a cultural product whose signification is submitted to constructionprocesses. In so far as the codified message , its documental value is susceptible tobe analyzed through the study of each one of the codes about which it is articulated.

It also supposes considering that each artistic image is an aesthetic

object, and, like one, asignificant space with informative and documental value,whose speech, in summary:

Can be located in contexts that explain its origin, function, use andtypology.Can be submitted to analytical processes that segment andcontinue its levels of representation and reference.Permits to establish correlations between the communicativefunction that each artistic image performs and the aestheticarchitecture it adopts.Is susceptible to be verbalized through documental representationsthat can be processed and recovered in documental environments.

Those considerations permit, subsequently:a) That the Documentation Sciences, through an enriching

disciplinary dialog with other sciences like Semiotics andIconology, are able to incorporate the artistic images as one oftheir study objects, enlarging their traditional list.

b) To conjugate in a same epistemological model of documentalanalysis the diverse elements that start to form the architecture ofeach artistic text, whatever its nature, and to simultaneouslyconsider the peculiarities that the diverse artistic genres createand update in each culture and historical period.


29/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

,

c) To propose a specifically documental methodology of analysis ofcontent of artistic images oriented towards the production of

documental representations that permit to communicate andrecover the analysis made inside the information systems inwhich those artistic images are developed.

d) To develop algorithms of specific analysis that work asprocedures normalized for the documental representations and asmethodological specifications detailed for each kind of artisticimages.

Finally, it also permits to extrapolate, not only the model of analysis,

but also the methodology and the procedure to other iconic kinds simpler than theartistic images, but equally relevant to the Documentation Sciences, such as thephotojournalistic, advertising, documental, scientific, etc, images.

REFERENCES

AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. El anlisis de contenido y la representacindocumental de las imgenes pictricas: Una investigacin desarrollada sobre losretratos de Francisco de Goya. En ENCONTRO Nacional de Pesquisa em Cinciada Informao. VII ENANCIB (7.: 2006: Marlia, SP).Anais do VII Encontro Nacional de Pesquisa em Cincia da Informao: A dimenso epistemolgica da Cincia da Informao e suas interfaces tcnicas, polticas e institucionais nos processos de produo, acesso e disseminao da informao . Marlia: FFC/UNESP-PUBLICAES, 2006. 1 CD-ROM, p. 294-305.

AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C.Anlisis documental de contenido de la imagen artstica: Fundamentos y aplicacin a la produccin retratstica de Francisco de Goya.Zaragoza: Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza, 2006. Tesis doctoral. 1 CD-ROM.

AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C.Anlisis documental de contenido del retrato

pictrico . Propuesta epistemolgica y metodolgica aplicada a la obra de Francisco de Goya.Cartagena: Concejala de Cultura. Ayuntamiento; 3000 Informtica, 2006.Tendencias, 3

AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. Anlisis documental de contenido de las ilustracionesdel libro antiguo. En PEDRAZA GRACIA, M. J. (Ed.).Comercio y tasacin del libro antiguo: anlisis, identificacin y descripcin.Zaragoza: Prensas Universitarias deZaragoza, 2003, p. 81-116.


30/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. Metodologa para la indizacin de documentos notextuales: Algunas precisiones a propsito de los documentos grficos yaudiovisuales. En GARCA MARCO, F. J (Ed.)Organizacin del conocimiento en Sistemas de Informacin y Documentacin 3 . Zaragoza: ISKO-Espaa; Universidad,1998, p.145-160.

BARTHES, R.La aventura semiolgica.Barcelona: Planeta-Agostini, 1994.

BARTHES, R.La cmara lcida. Notas sobre la fotografa , Barcelona, Paids, 1991.

BARTHES, R.La Torre Eiffel. Textos sobre la imagen , Barcelona, Paids, 2001.

BERGER, J.Modos de ver.Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, 2000.

BRYSON, N.Visin y pintura. La lgica de la mirada.Madrid: Alianza editorial, 1991.Alianza Forma; 112.

BURKE, P.Historia social del conocimiento De Gutemberg a Diderot.Barcelona:Paids, 2002. Orgenes; 32.

BURKE, P.Visto no visto. El uso de la imagen como documento histrico. Barcelona. Crtica, 2001. Letras de humanidad.

CALABRESE, O.Como se lee una obra de arte.Madrid: Ctedra, 1993.

CALABRESE, O.El lenguaje del arte.Barcelona: Paids, 1995.

CALABRESE, O.La era neobarroca.Madrid: ctedra, 1989. Signo e imagen; 16.

CALABRESE, O.La machina della pittura.Bari: Laterza, 1985.

CALABRESE, O.Semiotica della pittura.Miln: Il Saggiatores, 1980.

CARRERE, A. y SABORIT, J. A.Retrica de la pintura.Madrid: Ctedra, 2000. Signoe imagen; 59.

CAWKELL, T. Image indexing and retrieval by content.Information Services and Use , 2000, 20, 1, p. 49-58.

DIJK, T. A. v.La ciencia del texto.Barcelona: Paids, 1992.

DIJK, T. A. v.Texto y contexto: Semntica y Pragmtica del discurso.3. ed. Madrid.Ctedra, 1988.

ECO, U.Tratado de Semitica general.4. ed. Barcelona: Lumen 1988.

ENSER, P. G. B. Progress in Documentation: Pictorial information retrieval.Journal


31/32

!" # $ " % " & % '( )*

of Documentation . 1995, 51, 2, p. 126-170.

GARCA MARCO, F. J. y AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. Cognitive models in pictoriaimage retrieval. En MUSTAFA EL HADI, W., MANIEZ, J. y POLLIT, S. A. (Eds).Structures and relations in Knowledge Organization: proceedings of the Fifth International ISKO Conference, 25-29 August 1998, Lille, France.Wnzburg: ErgonVerlag, 1998, p. 263-269.

GARCA MARCO, F. J. y AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. El anlisis de contenido delas reproducciones fotogrficas de obras artsticas. En VALLE GASTAMINZA, F. del(ed.). Manual de documentacin fotogrfica.Madrid: Sntesis, 1999. Biblioteconomay documentacin, p. 133-167.

GARCA MARCO, F. J. y AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. El anlisis de contenido delas imgenes artsticas.Informatio , 1998-1999, 3-4, p. 106-127.

GARCA MARCO, F. J. y AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C. Lenguajes documentalespara la descripcin de la obra grfica artstica. En VALLE GASTAMINZA, F. del (ed.). Manual de documentacin fotogrfica , Madrid, Sntesis, 1999, Biblioteconoma ydocumentacin, p. 169-204.

GROUPE .Tratado del signo visual para una retrica de la imagen.Madrid:Ctedra, 2000.HASKELL, F.La historia y sus imgenes. El arte y la interpretacin del pasado. Madrid. Alianza Editorial, 1994.

IZQUIERDO ARROYO, J. M. Eplogo: De la Semitica del discurso a la Semiticadocumental. En MOREIRO GONZLEZ, J. A.Aplicacin de las ciencias del texto al resumen documental.Madrid: B. O. E; Universidad Carlos III, 1993, p. 199-216.

JOLY, M.Introduction l'analyse de l'image,Paris, Nathan, 1993.JOLY, M.L'image et les signes. Aproches smiologiques de l'image fixe,Paris, Nathan, 1994.

MARIN, L. (ed.).tudes smiologiques.Paris: Klincksieck, 1971.

MUKAROVSKY, J.Escritos de esttica y Semitica del arte.Barcelona: Gustavo Gili,1977.

ODONELL, J.Avatares de la palabra. Del papiro al ciberespacio.Barcelona: Piados,2000. Comunicacin. Digital; 123.

PANOFSKY, E.El significado de las artes visuales.Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 1995.Alianza Forma; 4.

PREZ CARREO, F. El signo artstico. En BOZAL, V. (ed.).Historia de las ideas estticas y de las teoras artsticas contemporneas.Madrid: Visor, 1996. 2. v. Labalsa de Medusa; 80-81, v. 2, p. 58-72.


32/32

PINTO MOLINA, M., GARCA MARCO, F. J. y AGUSTN LACRUZ, M. del C.Indizacin y resumen de documentos digitales y multimedia: Tcnicas y procedimientos . Gijn: TREA, 2002. Biblioteconoma y administracin cultural; 62.PULTZ, J.La fotografa y el cuerpo.Madrid: Akal, 2003. Arte en contexto; 5.

SALABERT, P.(D)efecto de la pintura.Barcelona: Anthropos Editorial del Hombre,1985.

SANTAELLA, L. y NTH, W.Imagen. Comunicacin, semitica y medios.Kassel:Edition Reichenberger; 2003. Problemata Literaria; 55.

SAUSSURE, F. de.Curso de Lingstica General . Madrid: Akal, 1980. Universitaria;1.

SIMONE, R.La tercera fase: Formas de saber que estamos perdiendo.Madrid:Taurus, 2001.

ZUNZUNEGUI, S.Pensar la imagen.4. ed. Madrid: Ctedra; Universidad del PasVasco, 1998. Signo e imagen; 15.

Mara del Carmen Agustn LacruzDepartamento de Ciencias de la DocumentacinUniversidad de Zaragoza (Espaa)[email protected]

Article received in: 2006, 11, 1

Article accepts in: 2006, 11, 1

THE CONCEPT OF “ARTISTIC TEXT” AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE DOCUMENTATION SCIENCES

Documents

Transcript of THE CONCEPT OF “ARTISTIC TEXT” AND ITS IMPORTANCE FOR THE DOCUMENTATION SCIENCES